A Conservative Rewriting Of The 'Right To Work'

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "A Conservative Rewriting Of The 'Right To Work'"

Transcription

1 A Conservative Rewriting Of The 'Right To Work' The problem with talking about a right to work in the United States is that the term refers to two very different political and legal concepts. The first is the broader concept of having a positive right to gainful employment a right embraced by the political left, endorsed in 1944 by President Franklin Roosevelt in his Second Bill of Rights and embodied in the United Nations 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The second is the much narrower concept of having a right to work without being required (by an employer) to join an employees union a right embraced by the political right and embodied in the 1947 Taft-Hartley Act, as well as in various state laws. The U.S. Supreme Court s recent decision in Harris v. Quinn is about this second, narrower right to work. (The plaintiffs in Harris were represented by the right-leaning, anti-union National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation.) More precisely, Harris represents a new effort by the Supreme Court s rightleaning justices to use the First Amendment as a vehicle for expanding the anti-union concept of right to work. But Harris stands in stark contrast to how the high court s conservative justices have historically treated the First Amendment in this context. The First Amendment and the Broader Right to Work After a policeman in New Bedford, Massachusetts, was fired for political activity in 1891, Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, sitting on the Massachusetts Supreme Court that upheld the local law that allowed the policeman to be fired, wrote: There may be a constitutional right to talk politics, but there is no constitutional right to be a policeman. McAuliffe v. New Bedford, 155 Mass. 216, 29 N.E. 517 (1892). The McAuliffe case had nothing to do with unions, which is to say that Holmes was referring to the broader concept of having (or not having) a positive right to employment not to the narrower concept of having (or not having) a right to work without being a union member. Holmes point, in McAuliffe, was that people did not have a right to keep any particular job. They had a right to free speech, but that First Amendment right was not so robust as to protect them against getting fired for what they said. Justice Holmes maxim represented the law of the land for several decades. In 1952, for example, the Supreme Court upheld a collection of state laws designed to exclude communists from working in New York public schools. Adler v. Board of Ed. of City of New York, 342 U.S. 485 (1952). As Holmes had done in McAuliffe, the court recognized in Adler that the plaintiffs had First Amendment rights but that they had no right to work for the State in the school system. The First Amendment could protect their liberty to retain their beliefs and associations, but they might have to go elsewhere for employment. Id. at In other words, the First Amendment did not protect a broad right to work in the job of one s choosing. Adler was decided 6-3 by conservatives on the Vinson Court just before Earl Warren was confirmed the new chief justice in The three dissenters in Adler were Justices Hugo Black, Felix Frankfurter and William Douglas three FDR appointees who would soon become known as liberal lions on the Warren Court. The Warren Court eventually invoked the First Amendment to reject the McAuliffe/Adler view of employees rights. In 1968, Justice Thurgood Marshall, writing for an almost-unanimous Supreme Court,

2 held that public employees could not be fired for speaking out on matters of public importance. Pickering v. Board of Ed., 391 U.S. 563 (1968). After Pickering, Justice Holmes McAuliffe maxim was reduced to a footnote, often invoked only to be rejected, as courts (following Pickering) generally found that the First Amendment protected the right of public employees to work without being punished for their speech or associations. See, e.g., Tygrett v. Washington, 543 F.2d 840, & n.39 (D.C. Cir. 1974) ( we no longer regard as viable Justice Holmes statement in McAuliffe ). Notably, however, Pickering was only almost-unanimous. Justice Byron White filed a separate opinion, in which he concurred with the core of the court s decision but disagreed with what he saw as an overly expansive view of the First Amendment s protections. As White saw it, there were certain kinds of speech that could still get a school teacher fired, without violation of the First Amendment. Id. at 584 (White, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part). But it wasn t until White was part of a reconfigured Burger Court that he was able to successfully rein in what he saw as the excesses of Pickering. In 1983, White was joined by Nixon appointees William Burger, Lewis Powell and William Rehnquist and by the new Reagan appointee, Sandra Day O Connor in holding that public employees can be fired for what they say, if what they say is only a matter of personal interest and not a matter of public concern. Connick v. Myers, 461 U.S. 138, 147 (1983). According to this new conservative coalition, the First Amendment did not protect a broad right to work. Public employees were still subject to personnel decision[s] that are made in reaction to the employee s behavior. Id. Connick was decided 5-4. Justice William Brennan, who had been part of the Pickering decision, dissented, joined by Justices Marshall (the author of Pickering), John Paul Stevens and Henry Blackmun. In other words, the liberal side of the Supreme Court still felt that the First Amendment ought to protect a broad right to work without fear of retribution for one s speech. See id. at 156 (Brennan, J., dissenting). Just a few years later, the new Rehnquist Court heard a case in which a public employee had made a private comment about President Ronald Reagan to her husband, who was also a fellow employee, and had been fired for it. The Supreme Court's conservatives Rehnquist, White, O Connor and the newly appointed Antonin Scalia again wanted to uphold the firing, under Connick. See Rankin v. McPherson, 483 U.S. 378, 394 (1987) (Scalia, J., dissenting). But this time the liberal dissenters in Connick were joined by Justice Powell to form a majority, holding that, even after Connick, the First Amendment was still strong enough to protect a public employee s right to work and not be fired for something she said. Still later, the conservatives came back in the Roberts Court to once again limit the First Amendment s protection of a broader right to work without fear of retribution, holding that a public employee can be subjected to adverse employment actions for something he says this time if it was said pursuant to his official duties. Garcetti v. Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410 (2006). According to Justice Anthony Kennedy joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Scalia, Clarence Thomas as well as the newly appointed Samuel Alito Government employers, like private employers, need a significant degree of control over their employees words and actions; without it, there would be little chance for the efficient provision of public services. Id. at 418 (emphasis added). And again, the liberals Justices Stevens, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer all dissented, believing the First Amendment s protections ought to extend to protecting the employee against adverse action.

3 The Pickering-Connick-Rankin-Garcetti line of cases is still the law, when it comes to the broader right to work and First Amendment protections of that right. And from this line of cases, it s clear that where the broader right to work is concerned, it has long been the liberals who have embraced the First Amendment as a vehicle for protecting that right. The First Amendment and the Narrower Right to Work Meanwhile, as the Pickering-to-Garcetti line of cases developed regarding the broader right to work without fear of retribution for speech or associations, another line of cases was developing regarding the narrower, anti-union right to work. This narrower concept of the right to work developed as a response to closed shop agreements. That is, before 1947, an employer could lawfully agree to operate as a closed shop meaning, to facilitate the efficiency of negotiating with a single entity in collective bargaining, employers could lawfully agree to require that all employees be card carrying members of the employees union, thus making union membership a condition of employment. But the anti-union movement objected to these agreements, and began to advocate for a right to work without being required to join a union. In 1947, the Taft-Hartley Act promoted by big business and passed over President Harry Truman s veto made closed shops illegal. In the wake of Taft-Hartley, union membership could no longer be required as a condition of employment. But, under Taft-Hartley and other statutes, and as part of the employer-employee collective bargaining agreement, employers could still have union shops requiring nonunion employees to pay an "agency fee" to support the union s bargaining efforts. Plaintiffs challenged this agency fee under the First Amendment, claiming that it required nonunion members to support political speech and activity (by the union) that the nonunion member might disagree with. And in 1961, the Supreme Court indicated that agency fees would violate the First Amendment, to the extent they would require nonunion employees to support political speech they disagreed with. International Ass n of Machinists v. Street, 367 U.S. 740 (1961). The appropriate remedy for those who disagreed with the union s political activity, however, was not to do away altogether with requiring nonunion members to pay fees. Instead, employers and unions could work together to ensure that nonunion members who did not wish to support the union s political activities were refunded any portion of their fees that was not used strictly for collective bargaining purposes. Id. at This became known as the fair share fee. The rationale for the fair share fee is that the union is required to negotiate on behalf of all employees, and any collective bargaining agreement that is reached applies to all employees. So, if the union obtains a wage increase or better working conditions, all employees benefit from the union s efforts. Because nonunion members benefit from the union s efforts every bit as much as union members do, nonunion employees could still be required to pay their fair share to support the union s bargaining efforts. Cf. Knox v. Service Employees, 567 U.S.,slip op. at 10 (2012) ( The primary purpose of permitting unions to collect fees from nonmembers is to prevent nonmembers from free riding on the union s efforts, sharing the employment benefits obtained by the union s collective bargaining without sharing the costs incurred. ). But according to some advocates of the narrower, anti-union right to work, even the fair share fee was too much to ask. And in 1977, Detroit teachers brought their case to the Supreme Court, contending that

4 their First Amendment rights protected them against having to pay the fair share fee. But the court disagreed. In an opinion by Justice Potter Stewart, the court noted that the fair share fee supported only the union s collective bargaining efforts, and that the nonunion employees were not required to pay any money to support the union s other political speech or activities. Though the fee requirement has an impact on [employees ] First Amendment interests, that impact was not so great as to outweigh the interests of labor relations, and therefore the fair share fee was not unconstitutional. Abood v. Detroit Bd. of Ed., 431 U.S. 209, (1977). Notably, though Justices Rehnquist and Powell wrote concurring opinions expressing some disagreement with the majority s reasoning in Abood, no one dissented. Justice Powell joined by Chief Justice Burger and Justice Blackmun wanted a more extensive examination of the First Amendment concerns, but did not indicate any belief that the government s interests in labor relations could not still overcome those First Amendment concerns. Id. at (Powell, J., concurring in the judgment). And Justice Rehnquist actually referred to his position in another case (Elrod v. Burns, 427 U.S. 347, 376 (1976) (Powell, J., dissenting, joined by C.J. Burger and J. Rehnquist)) to indicate that he had no problem, under the First Amendment, with requiring public employees to contribute to the collective bargaining expenses of a labor union. Abood, 431 U.S. at (Rehnquist, J., concurring). In other words, the same conservative justices who had no problem curbing the scope of First Amendment protections in the Connick and Rankin cases, also didn t seem to have much of a problem with curbing the scope of the First Amendment where the narrower, anti-union right to work was concerned. In short, the narrower right to work up through and after Abood was about only the right to work without having to join a union, and without having to financially support a union s political activities. But now things have changed. Harris v. Quinn and the New Right to Work The facts, details and potential ramifications of the Harris decision have been covered extensively. In short, the Supreme Court in an opinion by Justice Alito, joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Scalia, Thomas and Kennedy created a new class of "quasi-public employees," to distinguish Harris from Abood, and then held in direct contrast to Abood that requiring these employees to pay a fair share fee to support the union s collective bargaining efforts violated the employees First Amendment rights. Harris v. Quinn, U.S., 134 S. Ct (June 30, 2014). What is most striking about the Harris decision is its break with past jurisprudence and specifically with its break from past conservative jurisprudence. As demonstrated above, Supreme Court conservatives have for decades rejected using the First Amendment to protect the right to work. In Abood, the high court s most stalwart conservatives even agreed with the rejection of a First Amendment challenge to a fair share fee requirement. In fact, the Harris majority is the exact same majority that, just a few years ago in Garcetti, rejected a First Amendment challenge to an adverse employment action by declaring that government employers need a significant degree of control over their employees words and actions. 547 U.S. at 418. Why this should justify actions against a public employee in Garcetti, but cannot justify requiring public employees to pay a fair share fee to support a union s efforts to improve working conditions, is difficult to discern.

5 Over the past 10 years or more, the increasingly anti-union rhetoric of the political right, combined with the increasingly popular view that the Roberts Court believes in expansive First Amendment rights, perhaps made the Harris decision seem natural and even predictable, coming from the Supreme Court s conservative majority. But, make no mistake: Harris represents something new a shift in the conservative view of the First Amendment in the context of public employment and a significant broadening of what was once a much narrower right to work in the context of public employee unions. By Jason P. Steed, Bell Nunnally & Martin LLP Jason Steed is an associate in Bell Nunnally & Martin's Dallas office. Originally published on Law360, September 2, Posted with permission.

AP Gov Chapter 15 Outline

AP Gov Chapter 15 Outline Law in the United States is based primarily on the English legal system because of our colonial heritage. Once the colonies became independent from England, they did not establish a new legal system. With

More information

CHAPTER 9. The Judiciary

CHAPTER 9. The Judiciary CHAPTER 9 The Judiciary The Nature of the Judicial System Introduction: Two types of cases: Criminal Law: The government charges an individual with violating one or more specific laws. Civil Law: The court

More information

The Judicial Branch. CP Political Systems

The Judicial Branch. CP Political Systems The Judicial Branch CP Political Systems Standards Content Standard 4: The student will examine the United States Constitution by comparing the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government

More information

Unit 4C STUDY GUIDE. The Judiciary. Use the Constitution to answer questions #1-9. Unless noted, all questions are based on Article III.

Unit 4C STUDY GUIDE. The Judiciary. Use the Constitution to answer questions #1-9. Unless noted, all questions are based on Article III. Unit 4C STUDY GUIDE The Judiciary Use the Constitution to answer questions #1-9. Unless noted, all questions are based on Article III. 1. What power is vested in the courts? 2. The shall extend to all

More information

AP Government Chapter 15 Reading Guide: The Judiciary

AP Government Chapter 15 Reading Guide: The Judiciary AP Government Chapter 15 Reading Guide: The Judiciary 1. According to Federalist 78, what s Hamilton s argument for why the SCOTUS is the weakest of the branches? Do you agree? 2. So the court has the

More information

Understanding the U.S. Supreme Court

Understanding the U.S. Supreme Court Understanding the U.S. Supreme Court Processing Supreme Court Cases Supreme Court Decision Making The Role of Law and Legal Principles Supreme Court Decision Making The Role of Politics Conducting Research

More information

Network Derived Domain Maps of the United States Supreme Court:

Network Derived Domain Maps of the United States Supreme Court: Network Derived Domain Maps of the United States Supreme Court: 50 years of Co-Voting Data and a Case Study on Abortion Peter A. Hook, J.D., M.S.L.I.S. Electronic Services Librarian, Indiana University

More information

The Effect of Public Opinion on the Voting Behavior of Supreme Court Justices. By Kristen Rosano

The Effect of Public Opinion on the Voting Behavior of Supreme Court Justices. By Kristen Rosano The Effect of Public Opinion on the Voting Behavior of Supreme Court Justices By Kristen Rosano A Thesis submitted to the faculty of the University of North Carolina in partial fulfillment of the requirements

More information

What If the Supreme Court Were Liberal?

What If the Supreme Court Were Liberal? What If the Supreme Court Were Liberal? With a possible Merrick Garland confirmation and the prospect of another Democrat in the Oval Office, the left can t help but dream about an ideal judicial docket:

More information

Sources and Consequences of Polarization on the U.S. Supreme Court Brandon Bartels

Sources and Consequences of Polarization on the U.S. Supreme Court Brandon Bartels Sources and Consequences of Polarization on the U.S. Supreme Court Brandon Bartels George Washington University Sources of Polarization Changing criteria for judicial appointments Demise of patronage and

More information

2007 Annenberg Public Policy Center Judicial Survey Exact Question Wording, By Category

2007 Annenberg Public Policy Center Judicial Survey Exact Question Wording, By Category 2007 Annenberg Public Policy Center Judicial Survey Exact Question Wording, By Category Prepared by Princeton Survey Research Associates International for the Annenberg Foundation Trust at Sunnylands n

More information

The United States Supreme Court

The United States Supreme Court The United States Supreme Court The Supreme Court Justices The main job of the nation s top court is to decide whether laws are allowable under the Constitution. The Supreme Court has original jurisdiction

More information

U.S. Court System. The U.S. Supreme Court Building in Washington D. C. Diagram of the U.S. Court System

U.S. Court System. The U.S. Supreme Court Building in Washington D. C. Diagram of the U.S. Court System http://www.maxwell.syr.edu/plegal/scales/court.html Page 1 of 5 10/10/011 U.S. Court System The U.S. Supreme Court Building in Washington D. C. Diagram of the U.S. Court System U.S. Supreme Court Federal

More information

Ch.9: The Judicial Branch

Ch.9: The Judicial Branch Ch.9: The Judicial Branch Learning Goal Students will be able to analyze the structure, function, and processes of the judicial branch as established in Article III of the Constitution; the judicial branches

More information

Renewed talk to limit a Supreme Court justice's time on the bench

Renewed talk to limit a Supreme Court justice's time on the bench Renewed talk to limit a Supreme Court justice's time on the bench By Associated Press, adapted by Newsela staff on 02.26.16 Word Count 911 U.S. Supreme Court justices pose for a group photo at the Supreme

More information

CONTENTS Chapter 1: Constitutional Background 21

CONTENTS Chapter 1: Constitutional Background 21 CONTENTS Introduction 12 Chapter 1: Constitutional Background 21 The Articles of Confederation and the Constitution of the United States 21 Primary Source: The Articles of Confederation (Excerpts) 22 Constitutional

More information

LEARNING OBJECTIVES After studying Chapter 16, you should be able to: 1. Understand the nature of the judicial system. 2. Explain how courts in the United States are organized and the nature of their jurisdiction.

More information

INTRO TO POLI SCI 11/30/15

INTRO TO POLI SCI 11/30/15 INTRO TO POLI SCI 11/30/15 Objective: SWBAT describe the type of court system in the US and how the Supreme Court works. Agenda: Turn in Late Work Judicial Branch Notes When your friend asks to borrow

More information

Appearing in the Film

Appearing in the Film Film Guide Narrated by Emmy-award winning actor Bradley Whitford, The Right to Unite is a short documentary that reveals the profound impact of Supreme Court decisions on working Americans. Powerful corporate

More information

Interpreting the Constitution

Interpreting the Constitution Interpreting the Constitution Now that we have learned about the contents of the United States Constitution, we must now look at how it is used. The Founding Fathers knew the world would change in ways

More information

No UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. REBECCA FRIEDRICHS, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants,

No UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. REBECCA FRIEDRICHS, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, Case: 13-57095 07/01/2014 ID: 9153024 DktEntry: 17 Page: 1 of 8 No. 13-57095 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT REBECCA FRIEDRICHS, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. CALIFORNIA TEACHERS

More information

III. OBAMA & THE COURTS

III. OBAMA & THE COURTS III. OBAMA & THE COURTS What is the most important issue in this election for many pro-family/pro-life conservatives? Consider these two numbers: Five That s the number of Supreme Court justices who will

More information

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010)

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010) Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010) Petitioner: Citizens United Respondent: Federal Election Commission Petitioner s Claim: That the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act violates the First

More information

a. Exceptions: Australia, Canada, Germany, India, and a few others B. Debate is over how the Constitution should be interpreted

a. Exceptions: Australia, Canada, Germany, India, and a few others B. Debate is over how the Constitution should be interpreted I. The American Judicial System A. Only in the United States do judges play so large a role in policy-making - The policy-making potential of the federal judiciary is enormous. Woodrow Wilson once described

More information

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 1 1 1 1 Stephen Kerr Eugster Telephone: +1.0.. Facsimile: +1...1 Attorney for Plaintiff Filed March 1, 01 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 0 1 0 1 STEPHEN KERR EUGSTER, Plaintiff,

More information

Foreword 11 Introduction 14. Chapter 1: Legalizing Abortion

Foreword 11 Introduction 14. Chapter 1: Legalizing Abortion Contents Foreword 11 Introduction 14 Chapter 1: Legalizing Abortion Case Overview: Roe v. Wade (1973) 22 1. Majority Opinion: The Fourteenth Amendment 25 Protects a Woman s Right to Abortion Harry Blackmun

More information

Chapter 10: The Judicial Branch

Chapter 10: The Judicial Branch Chapter 10: The Judicial Branch Section 1 Objectives: 1.) Explain the need for laws and a legal system 2.) Describe the role of courts in our legal system 3.) Compare the roles of state and federal courts

More information

Patterson, Chapter 14. The Federal Judicial System Applying the Law. Chapter Quiz

Patterson, Chapter 14. The Federal Judicial System Applying the Law. Chapter Quiz Patterson, Chapter 14 The Federal Judicial System Applying the Law Chapter Quiz 1. Federal judges are a) nominated by the Senate and approved by both houses of Congress. b) nominated by the president and

More information

6+ Decades of Freedom of Expression in the U.S. Supreme Court

6+ Decades of Freedom of Expression in the U.S. Supreme Court 6+ Decades of Freedom of Expression in the U.S. Supreme Court Lee Epstein, Andrew D. Martin & Kevin Quinn June 30, 2018 1 Summary Using a dataset consisting of the 2,967 votes cast by the Justices in the

More information

No IN THE Supreme Court of the United States. On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

No IN THE Supreme Court of the United States. On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit No. 14-1543 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States RONALD S. HINES, DOCTOR OF VETERINARY MEDICINE, v. Petitioner, BUD E. ALLDREDGE, JR., DOCTOR OF VETERINARY MEDICINE, ET AL., Respondents. On Petition

More information

THE JUDICIAL BRANCH: THE FEDERAL COURTS

THE JUDICIAL BRANCH: THE FEDERAL COURTS THE JUDICIAL BRANCH: THE FEDERAL COURTS DUAL COURT SYSTEM There are really two court systems in the United States National judiciary that extends over all 50 States Court systems found in each State (most

More information

Sentencing May Change With 2 Kennedy Clerks On High Court

Sentencing May Change With 2 Kennedy Clerks On High Court Sentencing May Change With 2 Kennedy Clerks On High Court By Alan Ellis and Mark Allenbaugh Published by Law360 (July 26, 2018) Shortly before his confirmation just over a year ago, we wrote about what

More information

Chapter 7: The Judicial Branch

Chapter 7: The Judicial Branch Chapter 7: The Judicial Branch US Government Week of January 22, 2018 [T]he judiciary is beyond comparison the weakest of the three departments of power; that it can never attack with success either of

More information

APPEARING FOR APPELLANTS: WILLIAM L. MESSENGER, National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, Springfield, Virginia.

APPEARING FOR APPELLANTS: WILLIAM L. MESSENGER, National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, Springfield, Virginia. 16-441-cv Jarvis v. Cuomo UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY

More information

The Nine: Inside The Secret World Of The Supreme Court PDF

The Nine: Inside The Secret World Of The Supreme Court PDF The Nine: Inside The Secret World Of The Supreme Court PDF Just in time for the 2008 presidential election, where the future of the Supreme Court will be at stake, Jeffrey Toobin reveals an institution

More information

Note REDEFINING WORKPLACE SPEECH AFTER JANUS

Note REDEFINING WORKPLACE SPEECH AFTER JANUS Copyright 2019 by Theo A. Lesczynski Printed in U.S.A. Vol. 113, No. 4 Note REDEFINING WORKPLACE SPEECH AFTER JANUS Theo A. Lesczynski ABSTRACT We have a First Amendment right to criticize the government.

More information

SPOTLIGHT. The Supreme Court 1

SPOTLIGHT. The Supreme Court 1 SPOTLIGHT The Supreme Court 1 WWW.KIDSDISCOVER.COM 1 2 3 With their serious black robes, the Supreme Court may look stern and even dull to some, but it is full of high drama. Some of the most historic

More information

Judiciary and Political Parties. Court Rulings on Parties. Presidential Nomination Rules. Presidential Nomination Rules

Judiciary and Political Parties. Court Rulings on Parties. Presidential Nomination Rules. Presidential Nomination Rules Judiciary and Political Parties Court rulings on rights of parties Parties and selection of judges Political party influence on judges decisions Court Rulings on Parties Supreme Court can and does avoid

More information

Supreme Court of the United States

Supreme Court of the United States Youth Movements: Protest! Power! Progress? Supreme Court of the United States Morse v. Frederick (2007) Director: Eli Liebell-McLean Assistant Director: Lucas Sass CJMUNC 2018 1 2018 Highland Park Model

More information

June 27, 2008 JUSTICES, RULING 5-4, ENDORSE PERSONAL RIGHT TO OWN GUN

June 27, 2008 JUSTICES, RULING 5-4, ENDORSE PERSONAL RIGHT TO OWN GUN June 27, 2008 JUSTICES, RULING 5-4, ENDORSE PERSONAL RIGHT TO OWN GUN By LINDA GREENHOUSE The Supreme Court on Thursday embraced the long-disputed view that the Second Amendment protects an individual

More information

The Judicial Branch INTRODUCTION TO THE FEDERAL COURTS

The Judicial Branch INTRODUCTION TO THE FEDERAL COURTS The Judicial Branch INTRODUCTION TO THE FEDERAL COURTS I. Types of law. A. Statutory: deals w/written statutes (laws). B. Common. 1. Based upon a system of unwritten law. 2. Unwritten laws are based upon

More information

Chapter 13: The Judiciary

Chapter 13: The Judiciary Learning Objectives «Understand the Role of the Judiciary in US Government and Significant Court Cases Chapter 13: The Judiciary «Apply the Principle of Judicial Review «Contrast the Doctrine of Judicial

More information

Ken Winneg: (215) , Kathleen Hall Jamieson: (215) ,

Ken Winneg: (215) , Kathleen Hall Jamieson: (215) , 1 Embargoed for release: For more information: Friday, September 16, 9:30 am Ken Winneg: (215) 898-2641, kwinneg@asc.upenn.edu Kathleen Hall Jamieson: (215) 898-9400, kjamieson@asc.upenn.edu Visit: www.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org

More information

U.S. Supreme Court 1998 Line Item Veto Act is Unconstitutional - Order Code A August 18, 1998

U.S. Supreme Court 1998 Line Item Veto Act is Unconstitutional - Order Code A August 18, 1998 U.S. Supreme Court 1998 Line Item Veto Act is Unconstitutional - Order Code 98-690A August 18, 1998 Congressional Research Service The Library of Congress - Line Item Veto Act Unconstitutional: Clinton

More information

TABLE OF CONTENTS I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...4 II. QUESTIONS PRESENTED...9 III. BACKGROUND California s Agency Shop" Provision...

TABLE OF CONTENTS I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...4 II. QUESTIONS PRESENTED...9 III. BACKGROUND California s Agency Shop Provision... BENCH MEMORANDUM To: From: The Honorable The Moot Court Board Bench Memo Committee Rhea Ghosh (chair) Garrett Cardillo Catherine Eagan Colleen McCullough Kaiyi Xie Date: November 16, 2015 Re: University

More information

Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association

Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association Berkeley Journal of Employment & Labor Law Volume 38 Issue 2 Article 5 7-1-2017 Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association Diana Liu Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/bjell

More information

Lecture Notes Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S (2002) Keith Burgess-Jackson 29 April 2016

Lecture Notes Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S (2002) Keith Burgess-Jackson 29 April 2016 Lecture Notes Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304-54 (2002) Keith Burgess-Jackson 29 April 2016 0. Composition of the Court. In Penry v. Lynaugh (1989), five justices held that capital punishment for the

More information

The Roberts Court: Year 1

The Roberts Court: Year 1 The Roberts Court: Year 1 Prof. Lori A. Ringhand* The 2005 term of the U.S. Supreme Court is of extraordinary interest to court observers. For the first time in 11 years, the Court s term commenced without

More information

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES (Bench Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2006 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus

More information

Unit 7 SG 1. Campaign Finance

Unit 7 SG 1. Campaign Finance Unit 7 SG 1 Campaign Finance I. Campaign Finance Campaigning for political office is expensive. 2016 Election Individual Small Donors Clinton $105.5 million Trump 280 million ($200 or less) Individual

More information

Topic 7 The Judicial Branch. Section One The National Judiciary

Topic 7 The Judicial Branch. Section One The National Judiciary Topic 7 The Judicial Branch Section One The National Judiciary Under the Articles of Confederation Under the Articles of Confederation, there was no national judiciary. All courts were State courts Under

More information

The selection of U.S. Supreme Court justices

The selection of U.S. Supreme Court justices ARTICLE The selection of U.S. Supreme Court justices Norman Dorsen* The selection process for U.S. Supreme Court justices has grown ever more complex. Presidents have the constitutional power to nominate

More information

COMMENTS DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA V. HELLER: THE INDIVIDUAL RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS

COMMENTS DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA V. HELLER: THE INDIVIDUAL RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS COMMENTS DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA V. HELLER: THE INDIVIDUAL RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall

More information

America s Federal Court System

America s Federal Court System America s Federal Court System How do we best balance the government s need to protect the security of the nation while guaranteeing the individuals personal liberties? I.) Judges vs. Legislators I.) Judges

More information

2018 Jackson Lewis P.C.

2018 Jackson Lewis P.C. 2017 Jackson Lewis P.C. 2018 THE MATERIALS CONTAINED IN THIS PRESENTATION WERE PREPARED BY THE LAW FIRM OF JACKSON LEWIS P.C. FOR THE PARTICIPANTS OWN REFERENCE IN CONNECTION WITH EDUCATION SEMINARS PRESENTED

More information

Campaign Finance Law and the Constitutionality of the Millionaire s Amendment : An Analysis of Davis v. Federal Election Commission

Campaign Finance Law and the Constitutionality of the Millionaire s Amendment : An Analysis of Davis v. Federal Election Commission Order Code RS22920 July 17, 2008 Summary Campaign Finance Law and the Constitutionality of the Millionaire s Amendment : An Analysis of Davis v. Federal Election Commission L. Paige Whitaker Legislative

More information

Flag Protection: A Brief History and Summary of Supreme Court Decisions and Proposed Constitutional Amendments

Flag Protection: A Brief History and Summary of Supreme Court Decisions and Proposed Constitutional Amendments : A Brief History and Summary of Supreme Court Decisions and Proposed Constitutional Amendments John R. Luckey Legislative Attorney February 7, 2012 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees

More information

4/17/2007 3:12:32 PM

4/17/2007 3:12:32 PM Constitutional Law Tenth Circuit Decides an English-Only Policy Enacted By a Government Employer Does Not Violate Free Speech of Public Employees Maldonado v. City of Altus, 433 F.3d 1294 (10th Cir. 2006)

More information

UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL OKLAHOMA Edmond, Oklahoma Jackson College of Graduate Studies & Research

UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL OKLAHOMA Edmond, Oklahoma Jackson College of Graduate Studies & Research UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL OKLAHOMA Edmond, Oklahoma Jackson College of Graduate Studies & Research Judicial Activism: A Study of the Warren Through Rehnquist Courts A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE FACULTY

More information

The Roberts Court and Freedom of Speech

The Roberts Court and Freedom of Speech Federal Communications Law Journal Volume 63 Issue 3 Article 2 5-2011 The Roberts Court and Freedom of Speech Erwin Chemerinsky University of California, Irvine School of Law Follow this and additional

More information

NCSL Supreme Court Roundup Part II:

NCSL Supreme Court Roundup Part II: NCSL Supreme Court Roundup Part II: Schuette v. CDA (affirmative action / equal protection clause) McCullen v. Coakley (abortion buffer zone / 1 st Am.) McCutcheon v. FEC (campaign finance / 1 st Am. )

More information

Public Employee Free Speech: The Policy Reasons for Rejecting a Per Se Rule Precluding Speech Rights

Public Employee Free Speech: The Policy Reasons for Rejecting a Per Se Rule Precluding Speech Rights Boston College Law Review Volume 46 Issue 4 Number 4 Article 5 7-1-2005 Public Employee Free Speech: The Policy Reasons for Rejecting a Per Se Rule Precluding Speech Rights Marni M. Zack Follow this and

More information

The Ideological Operation of the United States Supreme Court

The Ideological Operation of the United States Supreme Court The College at Brockport: State University of New York Digital Commons @Brockport Senior Honors Theses Master's Theses and Honors Projects Spring 2011 The Ideological Operation of the United States Supreme

More information

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Cite as: 533 U. S. (2001) 1 NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of

More information

Buckley v. Valeo (1976)

Buckley v. Valeo (1976) Appellant: James L. Buckley Appellee: Francis R. Valeo, secretary of the U.S. Senate Appellant s Claim: That various provisions of the 1974 amendments to the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (FECA)

More information

Roe v. Wade: 35 Years Young, and Once Again a Factor in a Presidential Race VICTORIA PRUSSEN SPEARS

Roe v. Wade: 35 Years Young, and Once Again a Factor in a Presidential Race VICTORIA PRUSSEN SPEARS Landmarks Roe v. Wade: 35 Years Young, and Once Again a Factor in a Presidential Race VICTORIA PRUSSEN SPEARS Revered and reviled as perhaps no other Supreme Court ruling of the 20th Century, Roe v. Wade

More information

THE JUDICIAL BRANCH. Article III. The Role of the Federal Court

THE JUDICIAL BRANCH. Article III. The Role of the Federal Court THE JUDICIAL BRANCH Section I Courts, Term of Office Section II Jurisdiction o Scope of Judicial Power o Supreme Court o Trial by Jury Section III Treason o Definition Punishment Article III The Role of

More information

Constitutional Law - Procedural Due Process - The Rights of a Non-Tenured Teacher upon Non- Renewal of His Contract at a State School

Constitutional Law - Procedural Due Process - The Rights of a Non-Tenured Teacher upon Non- Renewal of His Contract at a State School DePaul Law Review Volume 22 Issue 3 Spring 1973 Article 8 Constitutional Law - Procedural Due Process - The Rights of a Non-Tenured Teacher upon Non- Renewal of His Contract at a State School William E.

More information

Justice John Paul Stevens as Abortion-Rights Strategist

Justice John Paul Stevens as Abortion-Rights Strategist Justice John Paul Stevens as Abortion-Rights Strategist Linda Greenhouse * During his thirty-four years on the Supreme Court, Justice John Paul Stevens has played a significant but largely unrecognized

More information

A More Perfect Union. The Three Branches of the Federal Government. Teacher s Guide. The Presidency The Congress The Supreme Court

A More Perfect Union. The Three Branches of the Federal Government. Teacher s Guide. The Presidency The Congress The Supreme Court A More Perfect Union The Three Branches of the Federal Government The Presidency The Congress The Supreme Court Teacher s Guide Teacher s Guide for A More Perfect Union : The Three Branches of the Federal

More information

National Government Review. Kinda like Heads Up!

National Government Review. Kinda like Heads Up! National Government Review Kinda like Heads Up! Teamwork! Cannot say a word in the term (or derivative thereof) Must be Civics/Government specific in your clues But can use prior knowledge and history

More information

INTRODUCTION THE NATURE OF THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM

INTRODUCTION THE NATURE OF THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM Trace the historical evolution of the policy agenda of the Supreme Court. Examine the ways in which American courts are both democratic and undemocratic institutions. CHAPTER OVERVIEW INTRODUCTION Although

More information

Associate Justice Antonin Scalia

Associate Justice Antonin Scalia The Future of the Court Sotomayor Breyer Alito Kagan Thomas Scalia Roberts Kennedy NotoriousRBG Eric J. Williams, PhD. Dept. Chair of Criminology & Criminal Justice Studies Sonoma State University Associate

More information

Appendix A In this appendix, we present the following:

Appendix A In this appendix, we present the following: Online Appendix for: Charles Cameron and Jonathan Kastellec Are Supreme Court Nominations a Move-the-Median Game? January th, 16 Appendix A presents supplemental information relevant to our empirical analyses,

More information

Justice Souter on Government Speech

Justice Souter on Government Speech BYU Law Review Volume 2010 Issue 6 Article 4 12-18-2010 Justice Souter on Government Speech Sheldon Nahmod Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/lawreview Part of the First

More information

4 Takeaways From The High Court's New Rule On RICO's Reach

4 Takeaways From The High Court's New Rule On RICO's Reach Portfolio Media. Inc. 111 West 19 th Street, 5th Floor New York, NY 10011 www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 Fax: +1 646 783 7161 customerservice@law360.com 4 Takeaways From The High Court's New Rule

More information

The Courts CHAPTER. Criminal Justice: A Brief Introduction, 7E by Frank Schmalleger

The Courts CHAPTER. Criminal Justice: A Brief Introduction, 7E by Frank Schmalleger CHAPTER 7 The Courts 1 America s Dual Court System The United States has courts on both the federal and state levels. This dual system reflects the state s need to retain judicial autonomy separate from

More information

State Constitutions as the Future for Civil Rights

State Constitutions as the Future for Civil Rights 48 N.M. L. Rev. 259 (Establishing New Rights: A Look at Aid in Dying (Summer) 2018) 2018 State Constitutions as the Future for Civil Rights Erwin Chemerinsky University of California Berkeley Law Recommended

More information

Late on a January afternoon in 2006, Senator Charles Schumer was goading Samuel Alito to explain his stand on abortion rights. The Senate Judiciary

Late on a January afternoon in 2006, Senator Charles Schumer was goading Samuel Alito to explain his stand on abortion rights. The Senate Judiciary 1 Late on a January afternoon in 2006, Senator Charles Schumer was goading Samuel Alito to explain his stand on abortion rights. The Senate Judiciary Committee was in its second full day of hearings on

More information

BY SHEILA A. SUNDVALL, CHRISTOPHER F. ALLEN, & SUSAN E. JACOBY. I. Introduction. Background

BY SHEILA A. SUNDVALL, CHRISTOPHER F. ALLEN, & SUSAN E. JACOBY. I. Introduction. Background Russell v. SNFA: Illinois Supreme Court Adopts Expansive Interpretation of Personal Jurisdiction Under a Stream of Commerce Theory in the Wake of McIntyre v. Nicastro BY SHEILA A. SUNDVALL, CHRISTOPHER

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION Case 3:13-cv-02469-N Document 37 Filed 10/09/13 Page 1 of 17 PageID 706 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION JOSE SERNA, MARY RICHARDSON, ROBERTO CRUZ,

More information

Parental Notification of Abortion

Parental Notification of Abortion This document is made available electronically by the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library as part of an ongoing digital archiving project. http://www.leg.state.mn.us/lrl/lrl.asp October 1990 ~ H0 USE

More information

Was There Ever Such a Thing as Judicial Self-Restraint?

Was There Ever Such a Thing as Judicial Self-Restraint? Was There Ever Such a Thing as Judicial Self-Restraint? Lee Epstein & William M. Landes* Richard Posner s version of judicial self-restraint implies that individual Justices who embrace restraint would

More information

Contemporary History

Contemporary History Contemporary History What have been three causes of social and cultural change in America during the last 50 years? in the workplace Women and minorities The Supreme Court s Role New groups Technology

More information

C-SPAN SUPREME COURT SURVEY March 23, 2012

C-SPAN SUPREME COURT SURVEY March 23, 2012 C-SPAN SUPREME COURT SURVEY March 23, 2012 ROBERT GREEN, PRINCIPAL 1110 VERMONT AVE SUITE 1200 WASHINGTON, DC 20005 202-842-0500 Methodology Penn Schoen Berland (PSB) conducted online interviews on March

More information

Case 3:18-cv Document 1 Filed 03/15/18 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON TACOMA DIVISION

Case 3:18-cv Document 1 Filed 03/15/18 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON TACOMA DIVISION Case :-cv-00 Document Filed 0// Page of 0 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON TACOMA DIVISION Justin Carey; JoBeth Deibel; David Gaston; Roger Kinney; and Keith Sanborn,

More information

U.S. Supreme Court Surveys: Term

U.S. Supreme Court Surveys: Term U.S. Supreme Court Surveys: 2013 2014 Term Harris v. Quinn: What We Talk About When We Talk About Right-to-Work Laws Michael J. Yelnosky* Who could oppose a right to work? What could anyone find objectionable

More information

THE JUDICIARY. In this chapter we will cover

THE JUDICIARY. In this chapter we will cover THE JUDICIARY THE JUDICIARY In this chapter we will cover The Constitution and the National Judiciary The American Legal System The Federal Court System How Federal Court Judges are Selected The Supreme

More information

The Proper Role for the Supreme Court: Activist or Restraint by Dave Saffell Introduction

The Proper Role for the Supreme Court: Activist or Restraint by Dave Saffell Introduction The Proper Role for the Supreme Court: Activist or Restraint by Dave Saffell Introduction One of the enduring subjects for debate about American government is: What is the proper role for the Supreme Court

More information

Supreme Court Decisions

Supreme Court Decisions Hoover Press : Anderson DP5 HPANNE0900 10-04-00 rev1 page 187 PART TWO Supreme Court Decisions This section does not try to be a systematic review of Supreme Court decisions in the field of campaign finance;

More information

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database Roudebush v. Hartke 405 U.S. 15 (1972) Paul J. Wahlbeck, George Washington University James F. Spriggs, II, Washington University Forrest Maltzman, George Washington

More information

- F.3d, 2009 WL , C.A.Fed. (Mass.), April 03, 2009 (NO )

- F.3d, 2009 WL , C.A.Fed. (Mass.), April 03, 2009 (NO ) CITE AS: 1 HASTINGS. SCI. AND TECH. L.J. 269 ARIAD PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. V. ELI LILLY AND COMPANY - F.3d, 2009 WL 877642, C.A.Fed. (Mass.), April 03, 2009 (NO. 2008-1248) I. STATEMENT OF THE FACTS Defendant-Appellant

More information

DEFENDING EQUILIBRIUM-ADJUSTMENT

DEFENDING EQUILIBRIUM-ADJUSTMENT DEFENDING EQUILIBRIUM-ADJUSTMENT Orin S. Kerr I thank Professor Christopher Slobogin for responding to my recent Article, An Equilibrium-Adjustment Theory of the Fourth Amendment. 1 My Article contended

More information

PROCEDURE AND STRATEGY IN GAY RIGHTS LITIGATION

PROCEDURE AND STRATEGY IN GAY RIGHTS LITIGATION PROCEDURE AND STRATEGY IN GAY RIGHTS LITIGATION THOMAS F. COLEMAN This morning we heard Cary Boggan, chairperson of the A.B.A. Section of Individual Rights and Responsibilities, discuss the right to privacy

More information

Can Ideal Point Estimates be Used as Explanatory Variables?

Can Ideal Point Estimates be Used as Explanatory Variables? Can Ideal Point Estimates be Used as Explanatory Variables? Andrew D. Martin Washington University admartin@wustl.edu Kevin M. Quinn Harvard University kevin quinn@harvard.edu October 8, 2005 1 Introduction

More information

No MARK JANUS, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY, AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES, COUNCIL 31, ET AL., Respondents.

No MARK JANUS, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY, AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES, COUNCIL 31, ET AL., Respondents. No. 16-1466 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States MARK JANUS, v. Petitioner, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY, AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES, COUNCIL 31, ET AL., Respondents. On Petition for Writ of

More information

Expert Analysis Strip-Searched for Failing to Pay a Speeding Ticket? Florence And the Fourth Amendment

Expert Analysis Strip-Searched for Failing to Pay a Speeding Ticket? Florence And the Fourth Amendment Westlaw Journal CLASS ACTION Litigation News and Analysis Legislation Regulation Expert Commentary VOLUME 18, ISSUE 11 / DECEMBER 2011 Expert Analysis Strip-Searched for Failing to Pay a Speeding Ticket?

More information

SHIFTS IN SUPREME COURT OPINION ABOUT MONEY IN POLITICS

SHIFTS IN SUPREME COURT OPINION ABOUT MONEY IN POLITICS SHIFTS IN SUPREME COURT OPINION ABOUT MONEY IN POLITICS Before 1970, campaign finance regulation was weak and ineffective, and the Supreme Court infrequently heard cases on it. The Federal Corrupt Practices

More information

Copyright 2018 by Courtlyn G. Roser-Jones Vol. 112, No. 4. Articles

Copyright 2018 by Courtlyn G. Roser-Jones Vol. 112, No. 4. Articles Copyright 2018 by Courtlyn G. Roser-Jones Printed in U.S.A. Vol. 112, No. 4 Articles RECONCILING AGENCY FEE DOCTRINE, THE FIRST AMENDMENT, AND THE MODERN PUBLIC SECTOR UNION Courtlyn G. Roser-Jones ABSTRACT

More information

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, FOR PUBLICATION August 26, 2010 9:10 a.m. v No. 292288 Saginaw Circuit Court REGINAL LAVAL SHORT, also known as LC

More information